You are here:
Auto News >
General Motors sees ethanol, fuel cell future while hybrids are for 'image'

General Motors sees ethanol, fuel cell future while hybrids are for 'image'

Posted May 13th 2006 7:08PM

CommentsAdd

In an interview this week, Rick Wagoner, CEO of General Motors, stated GM plans to make ethanol its primary means to reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil. The company is not only seeking ways to increase E85 distribution but also plans to bring fuel cell technology to market by 2010. Wagoner emphasized that while the world's largest automaker will continue to manufacture hybrid vehicles such as the hybrid Saturn Vue, it was more for "image" than actual long-term demand. It will be interesting to see if his words are prophetic since hybrid sales have been static despite rising fuel costs.

[Source: Reuters]

Category: Trends, Hybrid, Plants/Manufacturing, Marketing/Advertising

Tags: ethanol, fuel cell

New Features From Our Partners

Car Finder Helps You Find Your Perfect Car
Automotive Topics In-Depth
How To Read A Vehicle History Report

2010 New York International Auto Show

Add a Comment

Sign in »

52 Comments

Filter by:

MikeW

Engines can make more power with E85, not because the effective AKI is higher, because even though the energy density is lower, the air:fuel ratio more than makes up for that.

But WHY?, there isn't enough ethanol for gasoline dilution, a practice that should end immediately, let alone for use at E50 nation wide.
E100 can only reliably start an engine down to 59 F, Doesn't happen in Brazil
gasoline can work to what synthetic 0w-20 can work -50F [just wait for the climate change]

May 15 2006 at 8:09 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Richard Warren

At the moment E85 costs more to produce, but it's pretty early in the game to get a handle on the real costs. Did any of you watch 60 minutes 2 weeks ago where they we discussing ethanol? That was filmed and a lot of the discussions with the folks were close to where I live, 4 miles actually, I personally know those players. I personally have money invested in that particular plant.

http://www.pinelakecorn.com/index.html

Each day as they learn more, that plant becomes more efficient and they find ways to drive down costs. While I normally don't agree with government susidies, sometimes that money helps to make some changes that can benefit us all and sometimes it's a sinkhole. There is another new company that is producing a different product here and it plays back to the cost of producing the E85 in the corn drying stage.

It also addresses some of the oil based chemical fertilizer questions. It had help from a government grant and this company is growing and doing some amazing things.

http://www.grro.net/news/news_11122004.html

GM, not trying at all levels, is short sighted.

E85 is not the whole answer, but it's a start.

May 15 2006 at 3:15 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Steve

I'm still not sure I understand how a switch to ethanol will relieve our dependence on foreign oil. Know who produces the most ethanol in the world? Brazil. So I'm guessing we'll still be dependent on foreign fuel, just from Brazil this time.

May 15 2006 at 8:30 AM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Andrew

Roger

First, you have a good point that multiple approaches can be combined. A technology that reduces consumption 20,10, or even 1% helps.

One item not mentioned is simply buying smaller cars. This is low-tech, practical proven method (also known as "not pushing 3 tons of steel down the road"). Also politically unpopular.

There is nothing sexy, hi-tech etc about trading in an SUV for a minivan. Also driving minivans might cause millions of Americans to lose their sense of worth.

The problem with cellulosic ethanol is that it is not practical - yet. Currently this method is not used for significant production. It *might* prove to be popular, we just don't know. Remember that post-WWII there were predictions that the average person would each have a private "flying car". Time will tell.

For all you ethanolanders out there, provice a link for a production cellulosic plant with significant production.

May 14 2006 at 11:12 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

John

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/may2006/bw20060508_871545.htm?chan=autos_autos+index+page_news

The argument basically runs as follows. Take the current annual U.S. consumption of gasoline. Assume that 'aggressive hybridization' cuts it by a quarter (mainly in city driving), and that a further quarter is cut by better aerodynamics and engine downsizing (enabled by hybridization), mainly in freeway driving. Now take a further slice out for plug-in electric drives, and assume that the U.S can continue to source at least 25 percent of its gasoline internally. That leaves an ethanol target of less than a quarter of current gasoline consumption to make the U.S. 'gasoline independent' again. The United States Departments of Agriculture and Energy have recently produced a joint report which confirms that producing this quantity of ethanol is readily achievable without impinging on the current food producing capacity of the United States.

It is important to distinguish between corn ethanol and so-called cellulosic ethanol. Corn ethanol can be criticized because of the amount of fuel needed to produce it. On the other hand, cellulosic ethanol promises a 'one gets you seven' ratio. This translates to a near perfect CO2 score. For example, in Sweden E85 is all the rage, and Ford Sweden advertises that its flexifuel Ford Focus running on E85 generates only 32 grams per kilometer, against the Toyota Prius on bensin
(gasoline) which gets 104 g/km.

May 14 2006 at 9:38 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Phil_Errup

Okay, a little science to confuse the issue :-)

First, ethanol gets less MPG than gasoline because it has less energy pound for pound, so you have to burn more to get the same hp. But, since it is a simpler hydrocarbon, it does burn cleaner. And, unless we invent dinosaurs, oil is not renewable. Ethanol is.

But, all is not sweetness with ethanol. It is expensive to make, especially if you use corn instead of sugar. That means the era of cheap fuel is over........everybody done crying? Good, now lets talk about hydrogen.

Yes, fuel cells don't pollute, but neither do electric motors. They also share another common feature. Both use forms of energy that have to be created, not collected (collected means drilling or mining the fuel source in this case). While it's true that hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, hydrogen gas is extremely rare on earth. Almost all the hydrogen on this planet is locked up in water. The common way to get hydrogen is to either pass electricity through water, which requires lots of energy, or strip it off of hydrocarbons like natural gas, which produces carbon dioxide. Hydrogen is not an energy source, but a means of transporting energy, much like electricity. We can use fuel cells to power vehicles, but we need to find an energy source to create the hydrogen.

Ok, I'll shut up now. Discuss.

May 14 2006 at 7:26 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Sheniferous

The same anti-hybrid argument is to be used with E85 as well.

1) Yes, it does burn "cleaner" than regular gasoline, but you'd require more of it to go the same distance.

2) Why are oil companies getting behind E85? The resources required to produce a gallon of E85 is more than that of regular gasoline. It's the same reason oil companies are getting behind hydrogen, they still get the sell more of their product to the producer of these "alternative" fuels, rather than the the consumer.

Neither solves oil dependency.

May 14 2006 at 5:28 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

bhtooefr

#28 JR: OK...

What about 12:1 or 13:1 compression? And using a variable valve timing technology to hold the exhaust valve open a little longer when running on gasoline, so that you can lower the CR?

Alternately, throw a turbo on it, and up the boost when running on ethanol...

May 14 2006 at 4:39 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

Daveinil

I'm all for saving money, period. E85 doesn't do that for me. It is .20 per gallon cheaper but you use more of it. I'll keep using regular.

May 14 2006 at 4:36 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply

John

So now Hydrogen is bad?
You guys are insatiable!!!
Really....

I tell you , I knew it all along. It's all about taxes--nothing more , nothing less. Social control of the economy.

Here are your alternatives:

1. Promote ethanol usage, which burns cleaner but costs more. Let the consumer pay.

or

2. Tax gasoline at $3.00 per gallon and promote hybrids (gas usage in perpetuity).

Guess what outcome seems to be the one they're pushing?

Please drop the pretense about oil "addictions". You guys have NO solutions for the use of oil. I don't think that is even the goal, although you say it is. GASOLINE-using hybrids certainly aren't a solution!

I would rather pay a LITTLE more for a CLEANER fuel and ACTUALLY save the planet, than pay $3.00 a gallon in taxes to some yapping politicians with no clear idea of how greater tax revenue will ELIMINATE the use of oil. For all the taxes Europeans pay, they STILL use oil. The only reason they use less is because their economies are smaller and more sluggish.

People who clamor for high gas taxes should never complain about the extra cost of ethanol (due to lower energy content). It sure wouldn't cost $6.00 per gallon to use overall, and it would STILL be cleaner than gas.

And as for this?
------------------
"I'll bet $1K right now there will be no viable hydrogen vehicles in 4 years from any producer. Barring any miraculous breakthroughs in the next year or two, there will be no viable hydrogen vehicles for 10 years. There will be no hydrogen infrastructure for 20 years. BTW, that's 20 years if we start building tomorrow, and throw $500+ billion at it. Oh, and where do you think that hydrogen is coming from? Extracted from non-renewables. Bonus round, tiny amounts of hydrogen leaking from millions of vehicle fuelings each day f'up every valid climate model like nobody's business."
--------------------

Please!

Firstly, GM and other manufacturers already have working hydrogen cars (GM alone having 3 models) all manufactured and driven.
GM will certainly (barring UAW theatrics) have a fuel cell in 4 years to sell to the public. They are already prepared to take the loss for the publicity (like the Toyota Prius did for Toyota).

Secondly, climate change "models" are already rubbish as it is. "Leaked hydrogen"? What a rubbish excuse.
But as much as you canmake up onsense excuses in a few hours, I am sure that is what they will be sayign next.

I will say it again. These same people will try to block ANY advancement in hydrogen or any other non-fossil fuel alternative on the most spurious of grounds, while trying to feign concern for the environment.
They need you to keep using fuels that they can tax readily. It's about taxes and regulation, not "the environment". "Non-Profit" and government entities have vested interests too!